Influence of initiator and different polymerisation conditions on performance of molecularly imprinted polymers

Abstract

A set of polymers was imprinted with (-)-ephedrine using two different initiators. A chemometrics approach was used to optimise experiments aimed at analysis of the interplay of parameters such as polymerisation time, temperature and percentage of initiator. The results presented demonstrate the importance of keeping the right balance between these various parameters of polymerisation conditions. It is shown that enhancing one single parameter such as polymer rigidity does not necessarily improve polymer performance. In general it could be concluded that MIPs should be synthesised over a long period of time using low concentration of initiator and low temperature. The best selectivity was achieved for polymers prepared by photo-initiation with 2,2-dimethoxy-2-phenylacetophenone as initiator.

The rational development of molecularly imprinted polymer-based sensors for protein detection

“…The polymerisation time and initiator concentration can be optimised by experiment, although low initiator concentrations and longer polymerisation times have been shown to be beneficial in the imprinting of low molar mass compounds. 228 Once polymerisation is complete the template molecule (the protein or peptide) must be extracted with a suitable solvent in order to allow the specific recognition sites created by the imprinting process to be available for binding. The washing conditions used for template removal need to be carefully selected in order to preserve the integrity of the imprint sites, while removing as much template as possible.…”

Multi-templated Pb-Zn-Hg Ion Imprinted Polymer for the Selective and Simultaneous Removal of Toxic Metallic Ions from Wastewater

“…However, these methods have been reported to have some challenges such as high cost (Chee, Wong, & Lee, 1996), require a trained personnel (Ahmad, Mohd, & Universiti, 2015), high energy consumption (Perdew, Burke, & Ernzerhof, 1996), use of large quantities of chemicals (Atassi, Tally, & Ismail, 2008), poor removal rate to meet the pollution control limits (Piletska et al, 2008), low mechanical strength of adsorbents (Özcan, Sahin, & Sahin, 2008), weak hydrothermal stability (Firouzzare & Wang, 2012), poor selectivity (O'Mahony, Molinelli, Nolan, Smyth, & Mizaikoff, 2005) and time consuming (Mijangos et al, 2006). or their combinations have been employed to eliminate the challenges of previous traditional methods (C.-Y.…”

Optimal synthesis of a Ni(II)-dimethylglyoxime ion-imprinted polymer for the enrichment of Ni(II) ions in water, soil and mine tailing samples

“…There are several factors that influence the polymerisation, and hence the subsequent performance of the IIPs. These factors include the nature and masses of monomers Yu and Mosbach, 2000;Okutucu and Telefoncu, 2008;Piletska et al, 2009;Yilmaz et al, 1999;Zhang et al, 2005;Zhang and Li, 2006;Song et al, 2009;He et al, 2007;Kim and Spivak, 2003;Andersson et al, 1999), crosslinkers (Wulff and Sarchan, 1972;Yan and Ramström, 2005;Zhu et al, 2007;Yu and Mosbach, 2000;Okutucu and Telefoncu, 2008;Piletska et al, 2009;Yilmaz et al, 1999;Zhang et al, 2005;Zhang and Li, 2006;Song et al, 2009;He et al, 2007;Kim and Spivak, 2003;Andersson et al, 1999;Holland et al, 2010;Mijangos et al, 2006), porogen (Arshady andMosbach, 1981 andWulff andSarchan, 1972;Yan and Ramström, 2005;Zhu et al, 2007;Yu and Mosbach, 2000;Okutucu and Telefoncu, 2008;Holland et al, 2010;Mijangos et al, 2006;Yoshizako et al, 1998), template (Yilmaz et al, 1999;Zhang and Li, 2006;He et al, 2007;…”

“…It is therefore important to optimise the parameters in order to drive the equilibrium of the polymerisation reaction towards complex formation, so as to improve the formation and performance of the IIP. There are several approaches that can be used to optimise these parameters (Yu and Mosbach, 2000;Okutucu and Telefoncu, 2008;Piletska et al, 2009;Yilmaz et al, 1999;Zhang et al, 2005;Zhang and Li, 2006;Song et al, 2009;He et al, 2007;Kim and Spivak, 2003;Andersson et al, 1999;Holland et al, 2010;Mijangos et al, 2006;Yoshizako et al, 1998;Chu and Lin, 2003). Most have reported an approach where a single parameter was varied with others kept constant Zhang et al, 2005;Zhang and Li, 2006;Song et al, 2009;Kim and Spivak, 2003;Holland et al, 2010 Yoshizako et al, 1998;Chu and Lin, 2003).…”

“…The most important parameters that determine the performance of IIPs are the molar ratios of crosslinkers to monomers (Yan and Ramström, 2005;Zhu et al, 2007;Yu and Mosbach, 2000;He et al, 2007;Spivak, 2005), monomers to template (Yan and Ramström, 2005;Yu and Mosbach, 2000;Yilmaz et al, 1999;Zhang and Li, 2006;He et al, 2007;Kim and Spivak, 2003;Andersson et al, 1999;Spivak, 2005), the volume and type of porogen (Yan and Ramström, 2005;Yu and Mosbach, 2000;Song et al, 2009;He et al, 2007;Yoshizako et al, 1998;Spivak, 2003) and the initiator used (Piletska et al, 2009;Mijangos et al, 2006;Yanagihara et al, 1999). The volume/mass of template used ought to be optimised, because increasing the concentration of the components in the polymerisation mixture will favour an increase in the pre-polymer complex, according to Le Chatelier's principle.…”